Glock 17 VS. Sig P226

Status
Not open for further replies.
I live on Puget Sound in Western Washington state. One could say that we experience a fair bit of humidity here. I have never, ever, experienced a rust problem with any of my SIG pistols.

SIGs more difficult to detail strip? One notes that there are obvious reasons Glock sells so many pistols, and Jiffy Lube's business is booming as well.

At any rate, my informal, ongoing survey of new shooters has SIG way ahead in the poll of which pistol feels best in the hand and points more naturally ... And personal experience reflects a decided edge in the accuracy department to SIG as well, particularly in 9mm and .40 S&W.
 
Sigs more accurate, especially in 9mm and .40?? That was surprising to read. Are you talking about the P210? I have shot 2 P228's and the accuracy was "service grade." The Glock's I have shot, in both 9mm and .45 have been much better in that department. The P220 in .45 cal, on the other hand, now that's an accurate gun. After forming my opinion, I have discovered that there are many others who will agree that the SIG P220 is more accurate than the 226/28, for the most part.
 
I just bought a G19 (my second Glock) because I like the size over the G17. For full size 9mm's I'll stick with my 2 P226's. Sigs seem much more comfortable to shoot in all calibers.

GLOOB's right about the P220. I have 4 and nothing compares with it when we talk about OOTB accuracy of a production gun in any caliber. But "service grade" accuracy for the P228? All I can say is: "You need to shoot mine.":D

BTW, I'm a big time SIG guy, but I also like Glocks. You won't go wrong either way.
 
Last edited:
I've owned both, still have P226's. My 17 was not reliable, which turned me off of Glocks. They also dont point naturally for me.

I find the SIG's to be more comfortable to shoot with and for me, point more naturally.

I suppose the older SIG's were more prone to rust, I doubt you'll see the newer ones rust. Then again, I own both, and its never been an issue, even in hot and humid SE PA summers.

As far as detail stripping, the SIG's are about as easy as anything else, once you've done one.
 
I prefer the p226, but you'll not see me saying anything negative about glocks or glock quality. The issue for me is simply grip angle. I really started shooting pistols on a P38, then to the 1911, next the beretta, then the p series sigs. Somewhere after I was turned on to sig P series I wound up with a glock 23, and felt it was a fine weapon. My number one consideration (reliability) was absolutely met by the Glock.

My issue is that if you look at my progression of pistols, none of them have such a radical (I know, it's not RADICAL like LUGER radical) grip angle as the glock. When I come out of the holster with a glock, it looks like I'm trying to shoot down satellites. I'm going over the target's head at 7 yards with my natural point. Could I overcome that with training? Yup. Sure could. But why? The P series are wonderful pistols, they've always gone bang for me, and when I draw, it doesn't look like I'm trying to lob one into the next county.

It might be just the opposite for you. A P series might come out of the holster pointed at an attacker's feet if you're used to glocks.
 
I'll take a Glock 17 any day of the week. I owned a P226 and it's a fine firearm and I still count a couple SIGs in the stable, but the G17 provides a very high level of performance along with unsurpassed user serviceability and low TCO.
 
Only Sig I ever had was a 228 and it was the most innacurate pistol I've shot. The Glock is easy to shoot and easy to maintain. Cheap parts and cheap mags. Go for the Glock!
 
Only Sig I ever had was a 228 and it was the most innacurate pistol I've shot.
Click to expand...

Wow. I assure you that's an anomaly. I've never seen an inaccurate Sig. I wonder if you had one with a major defect or a shot-out barrel or something. My p226 will make ragged holes @25 from a rest. Every Sig I've ever laid my hands on has been considerably more accurate than I'm capable of shooting.

I really wonder what was wrong with yours.
 
Sig P226, but I'd take an HK USPc 9mm over either. ;)

Sigs have nicer triggers, better grip ergonomics, and handle the recoil better. Glocks have a slightly more durable finish and weigh less.
 
Howdy Pablo45, and et al.,

Wow, what a loaded question. I'm pretty sure there are quite a few more passionate responses pending. I've had the good fortune to have each. Both are fine pistols and have virtues endearing the owner to those attributes. Let me have a go at what I've found with mine in respect to your inquiry.

Duty: Both are suitable, might be a slight advantage to the G17 due to the lower overall weight. If you are hauling it about all day long those ounces can add up.

Training: Again, both are suitable, with another slight advantage to the G17 in a straightforward manual of arms. There is a consistent trigger manipulation, and no de-cocking requirement for re-holstering.

Off Duty: similar to duty, lighter might be preferable. Point of information, Clint Smith has always advocated that weapons should be comforting not necessarily comfortable... just a thought.

Concealed: Very similar, possibly a slight edge to the SIG in that the grip is not quite the same size but then again my SIG mags are 15 rounds capacity while the Glock is 17 so it is just a bit more pronounced. Arguable but only you can assess the real significance to your lifestyle.

Home defense: My choice is Glock. Capacity is it for me. Even downloading by one the Glock has the advantage. Considering this particular application, I'm probably not going to grab an extra mag so it is going down with what is in the pistol.

Plinking: Both are great. SIG has an advantage in two areas, it is slightly more accurate than the Glock. I would say that at 25 yds, it is not that much of a difference but there is a difference, we are talking a fraction of an inch average deltas. Comfort is the other advantage. Due to the additional weight and grip configuration it is more comfortable to shoot a lot of rounds through. After shooting the Glock at some of the monthly club matches, my hand is a bit fatigued from the pounding of several hundred rounds launched in just a couple of hours of fun. Shooting the SIG in a similar fashion, I've found less fatigue in my hand but it is heavier to haul about on your hip. Also there are sharp edges on the magazine base plates on the SIG mags. Glock mags are all rounded. Yes, thing you notice when you're hauling the equipment about all day long.

In summary, I have both, like both for different reasons. Glock gets shot way more than SIG, about 4 to 1 ratio. Hope this info helps. Your mileage may vary. Get out there rent, borrow, try, and or buy them. They are all good!

Cheers!
 
I've owned both.

Not a fan of MIM, asymmetric grip bulges and having to learn two trigger pulls.

I currently shoot 9mm Glocks and P7M8s.
 
Not a fan of MIM, asymmetric grip bulges and having to learn two trigger pulls.

I currently shoot 9mm Glocks and P7M8s.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, isnt this a little contradictory? :)

I've owned Glocks and a P7M13. If you learned to shoot them, you spent more time learning between them, than it takes to learn a SIG with a standard SA/DA trigger. The P7's are really a gun unto themselves and you really need to either dedicate yourself to them, or you shoot everything else.

What parts on the SIG's are MIM?

I never noticed the grip bulge was in the way for right or left hand shooting. In fact, you cant even feel it.

The two trigger thing is just lack of training.
 
Own both Glocks and Sigs. Tend to grab a Glock when around town. Will start bringing my Sig P220 out in the woods with me.
 
sig frames are stamped steel. no more expensive, or fancy than the stamped steel on an ak. Glocks are polymer molded, which is equally inexpensive. The slide and barrel on a sig are machined, as well as the glocks. The reliability reputation goes to the glock, as has been my experiance. The accuracy is supposed to go with the sig, but for my money, dead on bullseye is as good as it gets. Both great pistols, the sig will cost you a few hundred bucks more.

I like Glocks,
Steven
 
SIG frames are aluminum. The older SIG's slides were stamped steel, the newer ones are SS.
 
If price is not a concern, I would take a Sig over a Glock. I have a gun by each company, and they are both excellent weapons. The reason I prefer the Sig is because of the trigger system. I don't think the Glock is even close to the quality and smoothness of the Sig trigger. Nonetheless, they are both great guns, so I had to have one of each.
 
Originally posted by stevereno1: sig frames are stamped steel. no more expensive, or fancy than the stamped steel on an ak. Glocks are polymer molded, which is equally inexpensive. The slide and barrel on a sig are machined, as well as the glocks. The reliability reputation goes to the glock, as has been my experiance. The accuracy is supposed to go with the sig, but for my money, dead on bullseye is as good as it gets. Both great pistols, the sig will cost you a few hundred bucks more.

I like Glocks,
Steven
Click to expand...

Based on some of your previous postings I figured you for a Beretta 92 man. ;)
 
and dont leave it where the dog might find it, especially if went shooting right after you ate some fried chicken. ;)
 
In which way? That you cant pistol whip someone holding a Glock, or you can do it to someone else using one? Or both. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Sig vs. Glock vs. Ruger
2
Replies
36
Views
10K
Gun Slinger
G
el Godfather
  • Locked
  • Poll
Glock 17 v Sig P226: which is better duty pistol?
2 3 4 5
Replies
105
Views
14K
tomrkba
tomrkba
B
  • Locked
  • Poll
Friend wants first gun! Glock vs SIG
2 3
Replies
64
Views
3K
bgm946
B
T
  • Locked
9mm for range
Replies
11
Views
674
PO2Hammer
PO2Hammer
O
  • Locked
Which one S&W 5906 or Sig P226?
2
Replies
36
Views
5K
rocinante
R
Back
Top